Search

We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :)
Please help by posting all issues here.

The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.

Accomplished Advocate

"A Minnesota gun owner suing the city of St. Cloud and three police officials after he was arrested while walking in public with his rifle saw a federal judge side with the city last week.

U.S. District Judge John R. Tunheim granted a motion by the City of St.Cloud and dismissed the case of Tyler Paul Gottwalt on March 28. The gun owner argued the city’s gun regulation is vague, overbroad and fundamentally unconstitutional in light of Minnesota’s preemption laws. This, in turn, led the defendants to overstep their powers, violating Gottwalt’s civil rights in the process.

Tunheim did not agree.

“Because Minnesota law does not permit an individual to publicly carry an AK-47 while in possession of a valid permit to carry a weapon, and because laws outlawing the public carrying of an AK-47 are not unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, the Court will grant the Defendants’ motion to dismiss Gottwalt’s claims,” wrote Tunheim in his 10-page opinion. ..."

Yes, yes, I see that the firearm in this case is a rifle, however 1) according to OCDO, MN has no RKBA in its Constitution, 2) according to the Federal judge the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply (and I hardly think he would draw a distinction between HGOC and LGOC), and 3) the man was charged with a violation of a local gun law, yet according to OCDO, there is complete state preemption.

Regular Member

What do you expect from a state that decided to send Al Franken to the US senate? Beyond that, it's becoming increasingly commonplace for judges on all levels to ignore state statutes and higher court rulings when it doesn't suit their political ideology.

Regular Member

Plaintiff's filed a well plead brief in my opinion. The not so honorable judge Tuneim in my opinion failed to follow SCOUS with regards to McDonald.. and is obviously not a supporter of " our right to keep and bear arms".. The judges decision will be over turned at the appellate level, in my humble opinion..

Founder's Club Member

"A Minnesota gun owner suing the city of St. Cloud and three police officials after he was arrested while walking in public with his rifle saw a federal judge side with the city last week.

U.S. District Judge John R. Tunheim granted a motion by the City of St.Cloud and dismissed the case of Tyler Paul Gottwalt on March 28. The gun owner argued the city’s gun regulation is vague, overbroad and fundamentally unconstitutional in light of Minnesota’s preemption laws. This, in turn, led the defendants to overstep their powers, violating Gottwalt’s civil rights in the process.

Tunheim did not agree.

“Because Minnesota law does not permit an individual to publicly carry an AK-47 while in possession of a valid permit to carry a weapon, and because laws outlawing the public carrying of an AK-47 are not unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, the Court will grant the Defendants’ motion to dismiss Gottwalt’s claims,” wrote Tunheim in his 10-page opinion. ..."

Yes, yes, I see that the firearm in this case is a rifle, however 1) according to OCDO, MN has no RKBA in its Constitution, 2) according to the Federal judge the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply (and I hardly think he would draw a distinction between HGOC and LGOC), and 3) the man was charged with a violation of a local gun law, yet according to OCDO, there is complete state preemption.

Campaign Veteran

Maybe he needs to get a blackpowder musket and march back across that bridge, get arrested again and find out where this judge thinks the 2A ends or begins. Ridiculous judgment the more times I read about it and consider it. Thank you for making that more pointed, Citizen.